The Civil Liberties of a Madman

The news story of Chris Dorner has rarely been discussed or reported on, even though the story itself is riveting. If you aren't caught up on the whole story, Chris Dorner was an LAPD officer who went on a killing spree after he was allegedly wronged by his superiors in the force. The police hunted him down to a cabin in the woods and burned the cabin down. That's all that is certain. That, and the fact the LAPD rammed into the same type of car that Dorner was driving and killed the innocent person inside.


While the LAPD claim otherwise, a tape taken from Dorner's final moments contains the words of police men giving the order to set fire to the cabin Chris Dorner was in. He was surrounded on all sides by armed policemen that were already firing at him.

This reminds me of our perilous times unit, where the LAPD is limiting the civil liberties of Dorner and people suspected to be Dorner in order to protect concerned Californians.

Even though Chris Dorner committed terrible crimes with his murdering spree, should the LAPD have followed procedure and have attempted to arrest him instead of burning him alive?

Symbolic Legislation

For the last two weeks our class has been trying to devise the best possible plan to rebuild the South after the Civil War. We've tried to pass train bills, land bills, teaching bills, and many others. Our goal was to repair the South as quickly and efficiently as possible. While our class is on topic, certain lawmakers are on a different schedule with the laws they make.

Nowadays, some legislators write up bills that they have no intention of passing. For instance, Idaho State Senator John Goedde introduced a bill that would make reading Atlas Shrugged a high school graduation requirement. Fox News reported that the bill was "bill as a protest to a state Board of Education decision to roll back online class requirements".
 

Ohio Senator Nina Turner also introduced a symbolic bill that would limit a man's ability to get a Viagra prescription. She wrote this bill to express her outrage at all of the birth-control laws being passed in her state. (Source)

We've seen certain actions take place after the Civil War that are similar to the creation of these laws. Andrew Johnson required that Southern Generals apologize at his office before he pardoned them of war crimes. Did this requirement bring the US any closer to being United again?

These bills are supposed to represent the belief of the legislator, and clearly aren't made with the thought of American citizens in mind. While protesting is perfectly acceptable, and in most cases encouraged, in the United States, perhaps legislation isn't the most efficient way to do so. Do you think these sorts of laws muck up our political system, or do you think they are an example of the 1st Amendment and should be respected?